Why Buoyancy Forces Cannot Be Ignored

July 28, 2010 2 Comments

Forces are at Work Beneath the Feet that Must be Reckoned

With Before Designing an Underground Structure
By Claude Goguen, P.E., LEED AP and Ronald Thornton, P.E.

Everyone probably remembers the images of US Airways Flight 1549

drifting in the middle of the Hudson River Jan. 15, 2009, while
frightened passengers disembarked onto the wings. The courageous
actions of the pilots and flight crew were credited for saving the lives of
all on board. But it was a physical force that kept the airplane afloat a

force known as buoyancy.

Buoyancy is also an important element of the annual National Concrete
Canoe Competition hosted by the American Society of Civil Engineers.
More than 200 university teams compete for Americas Cup of Civil
Engineering. The University of Berkeley won the 22nd NCCC title this
past June.
In the case of Flight 1549, or if youre building a concrete canoe,
buoyancy is a good thing. For those in the underground utility business,
however, it can be a pain if it is not accounted for in the design.
Buoyancy is defined as the tendency of a fluid to exert a supporting
upward force on a body placed in a fluid. The fluid can be a liquid, as in
the case of a boat floating on a lake, or the fluid can be a gas, as in a
helium-filled balloon floating in the atmosphere. A simple example of
buoyancy can be seen when trying to push an empty water bottle
downward in a sink full of water. When applying a downward force to
the water bottle from your hand, the water bottle will stay suspended in
place. But as soon as you remove your hand, the water bottle will float to
the surface. The buoyant force on the object determines whether or not
the object will sink or float.
Buoyancy wasnt officially documented and conceptually grasped until
Archimedes (287-212 B.C.) established the theory of flotation and
defined the buoyancy principle. He realized that submerged objects
always displace fluid upward. Then with that observation, he concluded
that this force (buoyant) must be equal to the weight of the displaced
fluid. Archimedes then went on to state that a solid object would float if
the density of the solid object were less than the density of the fluid and
vice versa. But what is the basic procedure to follow in order to
determine whether an underground concrete structure will resist
buoyant forces?

It can be determined if an underground concrete structure will float or

sink using basic principles. Essentially a concrete structure will not float
if the sum of the vertical downward forces is greater than the vertical
upward force. When applying this principle to a structure below grade, it
can be said that if the buoyant force (Fb) is greater than the mass of the
structure and the combined mass of soil surcharges and objects
contained within the structure, the structure will float.
Why is buoyancy an important factor in the design of an underground
concrete structure? The simple answer is that the buoyant forces created
by water need to be resisted to prevent the structure from floating or
shifting upward.
Determining water table levels
When designing an underground precast concrete structure, it is
necessary to know what structure to make as well as its intended use.
Typically contractors who need precast structures will present precasters
with details on what they need and give design requirements and
information on the underground conditions.
Not always, however, do they inform precasters about every detail,
especially job site conditions and problems in the construction area. Site
and subsurface conditions are vital pieces of information needed for the
design calculations to optimize the performance of the structure in the
installed condition and to prevent flotation. So how does the design
engineer determine when there could be a potential problem with the
jobsite conditions and with flotation?
First, the design engineer should review and investigate the plans,
specifications and soils reports to gain more insight about the project
and the underground conditions. After obtaining the requirements and
specifications for the structural design, the design engineer should
obtain extensive information on the soils and subsurface conditions. One

of the first factors that must be determined when analyzing an area in

which the concrete structure will be placed below grade is the water
table, or groundwater level. Obtaining this information will help the
designers identify sites where flotation may or may not be a factor in the
design. How can one determine the water table level in the project area?
The design engineer should check the soils report to obtain more
information on the area. The soils report is typically the most reliable
source of data, as its based on a study of the jobsite conditions. If there
isnt a soils report, core drilling may be necessary. By core drilling in the
vicinity of the project, the depth of the water level from grade can be
determined. It should be noted that groundwater levels identified on
drilling reports are only a snapshot in time and may not account for
seasonal variations. Another possible source of information would be
from local well drillers, who typically maintain records of water table
levels.
After the water table level has been determined and it is known that
there will most likely not be a problem with buoyancy or flotation issues,
the designer can focus on maximizing the structure without the
consideration of buoyant forces. In most cases, flotation will not be a
problem in areas of the country without groundwater (parts of Texas,
Arizona and Nevada) and where the groundwater is below the
anticipated depth of the structure. The fact that the buoyancy force
exists presupposes that the water table at the site is at an elevation above
the lowest point of the installed structure. If your structure is to be
placed above the groundwater level (according to the sites water table),
less concern is needed. On the other hand, areas where flotation causes
potential problems are typically at low elevation where the water level is
at grade (valleys, ocean shores) and in areas where groundwater is
present below grade at the time of installation (before soil has been
compacted).
Be aware of seasonal and regional variations

The water table is the upper level of an underground surface in which

the soil is saturated with water. The water table fluctuates both with the
seasons and from year to year because it is affected by climatic
variations and by the amount of precipitation used by vegetation. It also
is affected by excessive amounts of water withdrawn from wells or by
recharging them artificially. The design engineer should make certain to
account for seasonal and regional fluctuations in the water table level in
the design of an underground precast concrete structure; this will ensure
that the underground structure will not float or shift upward from a
water table level miscalculation.
Err on the conservative side
If there are no soils reports or previous water table data available for
fluctuations (seasonal and regional), most engineers will design the
structure on the conservative side. This will ensure that the structure
will be able to withstand seasonal and regional fluctuations.
Designing on the conservative side refers to a structure with the water
level at grade, even if flooding in that area is not common. A
conservative design pproach may contribute to offsetting unnecessary
and unforeseen costs when sufficient information about the soil/site
conditions is unavailable. Therefore, overdesigning a structure should be
kept to a minimum since this would add substantial costs to production.

Computing downward
(gravity) forces
After the water table level has
been identified, the design
engineer needs to look at
computing all the downward
forces that will be acting on the
structure. All vertical
downward forces are caused by
gravitational effects, which
need to be calculated in the
design of an underground
structure. Essentially, the
engineer determines if the total downward forces (gravitational, WT) are
greater than the upward force (buoyant, Fb). The total downward force
(WT) is calculated by the summation of all downward vertical forces
(W).
Depending on the design of the underground structure, the total vertical
downward forces (WT) may or may not be the same for all applications.
In a conservative approach, the design of underground structures
assumes that the water table at the specific site is at grade. In this case, it
is essential to account for all vertical downward forces (WT) to ensure
that the structure will not float (WT > Fb). For an underground
structure, designed for a worst-case scenario, the following vertical
downward forces (W) need to be considered:
Weight of all walls and slabs
Weight of soil on slabs
Weight of soil on shelf or shelves
Weight of equipment (permanent) inside structure
Weight of inverts inside structure
Friction of soil to soil

Additional concrete added inside structure

Weight of reinforcing steel
As noted previously, not all underground structures are the same, and
therefore some of the listed vertical downward forces (W) above may not
be included in the summation of total vertical downward force (WT).
Computing upward buoyant force
As stated in Archimedes Principle, an object is buoyed up by a force
equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Mathematically, the principle
is defined by the equation:

Fb = gf x nd
Fb = buoyant force (lb)
gf = density of water (62.4 lb/ft)
nd = displaced volume of the fluid (ft)
When analyzing buoyancy-related concrete applications, the structure is
typically below grade and stationary. Assuming the application is
stationary in a fluid, analysis uses the static equilibrium equation in the
vertical direction, S Fv = 0. Analyzing buoyancy related to underground
structures requires use of the same static equilibrium equation,
assuming the structure to be stationary and either submerged or
partially submerged in a fluid (in the latter case, the surrounding soil
/fill material and any associated groundwater).

Safety factor guidelines

The Factor of Safety (FS)
considers the relationship
between a resisting force and a
disturbing force. In this case,
its the relationship between the
weight of the structure and the
uplift force caused by
buoyancy. Failure occurs when
that factor of safety is less than
1.0.
Generally speaking, the greater
the FS the greater the impact to
the project/structure. An optimal design would be an appropriate FS
that is adequate for the conditions present at that specific site. It is
recommended that the designer choose an appropriate FS after
reviewing jobsite information.
According to ACI 350, the safety factor against flotation is usually
computed as the total dead weight of the structure divided by the total
hydrostatic uplift force. The FS should reflect the risk associated with
hydrostatic loading conditions.
In situations of flooding to the top of the structure and using deadweight resistance only, a FS of 1.10 is commonly used. In flood zone
areas, or where high groundwater conditions exist, a FS of 1.25 can be
used. Where maximum groundwater or flood levels are not well defined
or where soil friction is included in the flotation resistance, higher FS
values should be considered.
Buoyancy countermeasures
There are several methods that can be used in the industry to overcome
a buoyancy problem. If the design of the underground structure does not

meet the required safety factor, there are ways to fix the problem. Here
are some different methods used to overcome buoyancy, both before and
after shifting or flotation:
1. Base extension (cast-in-place or precast). Using the additional
weight of soil by adding shelves is a common method used to
counteract buoyancy. Extending the bottom slab horizontally
creates a shelf outside the walls of the structure and adds additional
resistance to the buoyant force. The additional vertical downward
force comes from the additional weight of the soil acting on the
shelves (Wshelf). The size of the shelf can be designed as large and
wide as needed so the buoyant force is resisted. However, limits in
shipping width must be considered. In many cases, this is the most
cost-effective method used to resist the buoyant force (Fb). When
pouring the shelf in place, mechanical connections must be
designed to resist the vertical shear forces. If possible, it is best to
have the shelf monolithically poured with the structure.
2. Anti-flotation slab. Another method that has been used in
construction is to anchor the structure to a large concrete mass
(shelf) poured on site or use precast concrete manufactured off site.
The structure sits directly on top of this large concrete mass that
has previously been poured in place or cast, cured and delivered by
an off-site manufacturer. This method can cause problems,
however, because both base slabs must sit flush on top of one other.
If base slabs are not aligned perfectly, cracking due to point loads
may result. Cast-in-place concrete can be expensive and cause
delays due to strength curing time. Precast concrete alleviates
alignment and delays for strength gain, but the sub-base must be
level and set flush. A mortar bed between the two surfaces is
recommended. To design the mechanical connection between the
anti-flotation slab and the structure, the net upward force must be
calculated. This calculation can be achieved by multiplying the
buoyant force by the FS, and subtracting the downward force.

3. Increase member thickness. One method used to overcome

buoyancy is to increase the concrete mass (m). This is
accomplished by increasing member thickness (walls and slabs).
Increasing the thickness of the walls and slabs can add a significant
downward gravitational force, but this may not be cost effective.
Increasing concrete mass can be an expensive alternative due to
increased materials and production costs.
4. Lower structure elevation and fill with additional concrete. Another
method used to overcome buoyancy is to set the precast structure
deeper than required for its functional purposes. This will add
additional soil weight on top of the structure to oppose buoyant
forces. Also, with the structure being deeper in the soil, some
contractors opt to pour additional concrete into the base of the
installed precast concrete structure. This will add more mass to the
structure, which helps overcome buoyancy (m > Fb).
It is a fairly simple concept: downward gravitational forces need to
exceed upward buoyant forces. Ignoring this may result in your structure
surfacing like a submarine in the South Pacific. Once a precast vault is
installed underground, you expect it to stay put. Since concrete is about
2.5 times heavier than water, one would not expect flotation to be much
of an issue with buried concrete structures, but in fact it is a serious
consideration in areas of high ground water.
Claude Goguen, P.E., LEED AP, is NPCAs director of Technical
Services.
Ronald Thornton, P.E., is a project manager for Delta Engineers in
Binghamton, N.Y., with more than 25 years of experience in the
concrete industry. He has extensive experience in the design,
manufacture and installation of precast products for use in state,
municipal and private projects. Thornton currently serves on the NPCA
Utility Product Committee as well as the ASTM C27 Committee.

Filed Under: Archive - 2009-2010, Precast Inc. Magazine, Precast Magazines

Tagged With: buoyancy, underground structure

Comments

Bob Grotke says

June 13, 2012 at 3:29 pm
The problem of bouyancy became an issue at my workplace a while back. Our
department has used open bottom Qberglass manholes for years and the typical
installation involved dewatering the excavation as required, placing the Qberglass
manhole in the proper orientation for the sewer pipes, and pouring mass concrete
around the base of the manhole, typically at least 1 foot thick and 1 foot wider
than the manhole diameter all around. After an initial set, the excavation would be
backQlled and compacted while the dewatering system remained operating. The
interior base of the manhole would be Qnished with additional concrete, formed to
provide a Tow channel with built up concrete haunches to direct the Tow. After
construction was complete, the dewatering system would be removed and the
ground water would return to seek its own level. Design was typically conservative
with satuarated ground assumed up to Qnished grade. We had never had any
problems with this construction, but the engineers managing the ofQce one day
decided that a 2-way reinforcing steel mat was required in the concrete base to
resist unopposed hydrostatic forces that could cause the cured concrete to fail. I
was assigned to determine what reinforcement was necessary. I stated that none
was necessary as the weight of the manhole, concrete base, manhole lid and
frame and the soil surcharge overcame the bouyant forces, the net force was
downward and any resulting bending stress in the concrete was within the limits
allowed by the ACI plain concrete building code. This resulted in much heated
discussion and agravation. I Qnally told management that if they sincerely believed
the reinforcement was necessary, they should just direct the crews to install the
reinforcement and they wouldnt get any arguments, however I believed it was not
necessary. The bad feelings resulting from this situation eventually led me to Qnd

emplyment elsewhere, but to this day I wonder if their thoughts about unopposed
hydrostatic forces had any merit.
Reply

ranga says
August 21, 2015 at 3:08 pm
Thanks Claude Goguen
Reply

Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required Qelds are marked *
Name *

Email *

Website

Comment

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr
title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite>
<code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike>
<strong>

POST COMMENT

CATEGORIES
2015 September-October (11)
2015 July-August (11)
2015 May-June (11)
2015 March-April (13)
2015 January-February (14)
2014 November-December (12)
2014 September-October (11)
2014 July-August (12)
2014 May-June (12)
2014 March-April (10)
2014 January-February (12)
2013 November-December (10)

2013 September-October (9)

2013 July-August (12)
2013 May-June (9)
2013 March-April (13)
2013 January-February (11)
2012 November-December (12)
2012 September-October (11)
2012 July-August (13)
2012 May-June (12)
2012 March-April (12)
2012 January-February (11)
2011 November-December (12)
2011 September-October (12)
2011 July-August (10)
2011 May-June (12)
2011 March-April (11)
2011 January-February (10)
Archive 2009-2010 (91)
Archive 2004-2008 (264)

Sponsor Links

Products

CertiQcation Publications

Why Precast?
All Precast

Blog

Education

Products
Precast University

NPCA

Directory

Foundation

Newsletters

NPCA

Lunch and Learns

Membership
Find Precast
Supplies
Technical Services
Marketing Toolkit
Political Action
Center
AfQnity Program

Shop

Access the Online

Learning Center

About
NPCA
Professional Staff

Meetings

Who We Are
Leadership

The Precast Show

Committees

Annual

Industry

Convention

Representation

NPCA Committee

Careers

Week
Calendar

Sustainability

Magazines

Classes

Plant
Resources

Safety

AfQliate Members
Association
Leadership School

Log In
Contact

2015 National Precast Concrete Association